Currently we have Charlie - 13 month old Patterdale terrier. Very well socialised with other dogs - goes running every day with other dogs of all shapes and sizes. Very bouncy/lively personality but never shown any sign of violence/fighting. He is also the proud owner of the kennel club bronze award (a miracle we got through that)

We are getting a Jack Russell/West Highland Terrier cross dog - from a friend whos ***** has had a litter of 4.

Any tips on how to introduce the two of them (in about 5 weeks), any lessons other people have etc etc.

I appreciate all dogs are different but any obvious traps not to fall into would be great.

Your current dog is still very young, and an exceptionally feisty type of terrier - one of the hardest there is in terms of courage and no reverse gear. What you have now is the boy not the man. It isn't an accident that almost all Patterdale owners kennel their dogs individually.

Your proposed dog is another terrier: not as hard as a Pat, but still a terrier.

And also another male.

You are setting yourself up for failure - and some nasty dog-fights. And possibly having to keep both of them separate all their lives (and they should both live well until their teens).

Instead I would recommend:

Waiting until your current dog is two (therefore adult)
Getting a b itch
Getting a breed as far removed from a terrier as you can

I know its exciting and you are looking forwards to the puppy and you don't want to let your friend down.... but..

Right NOW as Nettle says, your terrier is a boy.. not a man.

The SECOND you introduce another dog into the household, your current dog is either going to revert back to being a pup (but with a much older dogs strength!), OR he is going to view the incomer as competition and you will see that feisty side come out.

It sounds like your current dog is doing really really well, but you have another 18 months or so to go before all his characteristics and traits are truly 'set' - ie, he matures and is the dog he will be for the rest of his days.

Do not jeopardise that now, by chucking a competitor into the mix - you will upset the balance and it won't be for the better either.

Again as Nettle says, when you come to add a second dog in 18 months time, go for something that fits in with a terrier rather than will directly compete - and go for a b itch and you will have a MUCH happier time.

It probably sounds like we are being real killjoys, but living with dogs who hate one another is a NIGHTMARE, Nettle and myself have done it in the past, as have a lot of people and I doubt we could find you one single person who would risk it again.

We were thinking of adding the second dog when the first one is 18 months. He is a ridgeback male, so we thought of a female but still a ridgeback, main reason being that once Ridgebacks get 2-3 hours of physical and intellectual exercise per day, they are fairly mellow and low energy for the rest of the day... And it's just as easy (or perhaps equally difficult ) to take 2 ridgebacks out for a walk or a hike or a game as it is with 1.

I understand the 2 years "waiting period"... I also understand the opposite gender... but do you recommend different breeds in general, with totally different temperaments, energy levels, physical abilities, etc? Or do you just advice against having two terriers, especially Patterdales?

I bow to Nettle and Emmabeths experience on the matter, but I do know instances of 4+ Border Terriers living in reasonable harmony, but I don't know the sex and relevant age issues, nor whether they were all related. Also, at the risk of being unpopular with other terrier owners, I think the Border Terrier is one of the most civilised of all the terriers and able to get along fine with other dogs, so it isn't perhaps the best example. I don't know Patterdales at all, but I do know you can't take the batteries out a Jack Russell. A Jack Russell / Westie cross? Who knows, but I suspect that will be feisty little fella too. When I think, I do meet a woman who walks 3 Jack Russells, and they seem to get along without any obvious scars or bits missing, although one is very old and I've never had a very close look at the other two. They all mix my two with never a cross word so far.

I suspect a lot will depend on whether you're already committed Scadds. If you're free to do so, perhaps play safe and listen to the advice. If your pup is on its way, then at least you have been warned what might be in store. There is a chance you might be ok, but at the same time, you'd best prepare a long term strategy to cope if they just don't get along.

It CAN be done, it doesn't mean it SHOULD be done by most people. I know quite a few people who have multiple terriers, most of them are on the ball enough to get on top of any potential problems before they actually become problems. The ones who aren't? Well in my experience they either end up rehoming one or coming home one day to find one dead. Some get lucky and never have a problem but I wouldn't be prepared to gamble on my dogs lives. When terriers fall out they REALLY fall out and they don't tend to back down. And from what I've heard about Patterdales, they're harder and a lot more driven than other terriers.

Nettle wrote:an exceptionally feisty type of terrier - one of the hardest there is in terms of courage and no reverse gear. It isn't an accident that almost all Patterdale owners kennel their dogs individually.

Patts are usually psychopaths. They live to kill. They are bred for a tough job and they do it very well. The only terriers anything like a Patt in terms of kill drive are Plummers and working Bedlingtons (which are light years away from larry lambkin show Bedlingtons). The average lovely loving pet owner cannot begin to handle this drive. I have a LOT of experience with Patterdales (and more than a bit with other terriers too).

Borders and Jacks have a slightly different job - to bay and bolt, not to kill. Borders traditionally were kept with their pack of hounds, so any aggressive ones got eaten. BUT let us not think that these terriers are incapable of killing - they are well capable but they don't have the obsessive drive of the Patts. Fire them up, though, or create a grudge match, and it's odds-on that you (generic you not anyone specific) will wish you'd never thought of getting another terrier.

You can get two terriers of the mellower breeds that like each other and get on well, but for the majority, two terriers equals a fight, and many will fight and fight until one dies. So those of us who know our terriers suggest that the second dog is carefully chosen to be as unlike a terrier as possible.

With other breeds of dog, opposite genders work better than same-sex, though two or more males tend to gel better than two or more females. Those of us who keep a group of females or else a mixed group always watch them very carefully and defuse any potential discord before - well before -it gets heavy.

When any of us get a second (third, fourth etc) dog, we have to be honest why. We get it for ourselves. We might kid that it will be 'a little friend' for our existing dog, but this is highly unlikely. Most dogs will come to tolerate each other and in time might well like each other, but there will be equally many groups where the other dog is seen as a rival all its days. This may be neither here nor there with some breeds, especially if each has plenty of exercise, and plenty of space to get away from the other, but two terriers is an accident eager to happen.

Nettle wrote: When any of us get a second (third, fourth etc) dog, we have to be honest why. We get it for ourselves. We might kid that it will be 'a little friend' for our existing dog, but this is highly unlikely. Most dogs will come to tolerate each other and in time might well like each other, but there will be equally many groups where the other dog is seen as a rival all its days. This may be neither here nor there with some breeds, especially if each has plenty of exercise, and plenty of space to get away from the other, but two terriers is an accident eager to happen.

OK, my question of the day to Nettle (am joking ... I am not going to ask something every day I hope ).

Re the above, I may have completely misremembered but I thought that I had read on here from one of the trainers (and like I say I could have completely made this up, my memory is not what it was ) that dogs where happier when there is more than one dog (using the term to mean dog or b tch) in the family. Have I imagined this ?

I was thinking that down the line that I might get a buddy for Ted (this is at least 18 months away) but I would only want to do this if it would be good for him. My friend has two long haired Chihuahua boys and they seem so happy together (although when I dog sat them I guess I probably wouldn't have noticed if there were tensions now I think back ). Ted is absolutely my priority though so I'd like to know more.

I've read the two puppies thread, but this is different, are there other threads/things I can read? I understand that there are no guarantees and that even if did everything "right" some dogs just won't get along but if it would absolutely make Ted's life less happy then I am more than happy with one dog (I am thankful every day for him as I never thought I'd be in a position to have a dog).

I also clearly don't need to make any decisions for a good while yet but I do like to be prepared for things

Most dogs would rather be only dogs, as long as they get plenty of attention and exercise, and things to do. They may well enjoy meeting certain dogs out on walks, and romp with them or else walk happily with them (depending on age and temperament). But they like to have their resources safely theirs. Dogs don't share by nature; their philosophy is 'me first' and other dogs in the home are far more often seen as rivals/threats/nuisances than little buddies.

Dogs have evolved to live with people. You rarely see a dog with SA for another dog. When dogs howl or bark for hours because they have been left alone, you rarely hear other dogs answer.

That does not mean that certain dog 'families' cannot get along and even like each other, miss each other terribly when one dies - though that is all about self again, as the one left feels insecure.

Lots of us, me included, have several dogs. We have to work at making it work, and we do that by carefully choosing the ages, sizes, genders and breed mixes - and by constant vigilance and pro-active management.

So -those who want to get a second dog - you are getting it for YOU. Nothing wrong with that - but don't expect the first dog to fall round its neck with eager happiness. It's a bonus if they get on, but it's not a given.

And to elaborate - the comparison I use is for people to imagine that their Significant Other has brought home a new partner. S/he says that as it's been so much fun having you, s/he has brought home another person to live with you both, and you are SURE to be friends

Nettle wrote:Most dogs would rather be only dogs, as long as they get plenty of attention and exercise, and things to do. They may well enjoy meeting certain dogs out on walks, and romp with them or else walk happily with them (depending on age and temperament). But they like to have their resources safely theirs. Dogs don't share by nature; their philosophy is 'me first' and other dogs in the home are far more often seen as rivals/threats/nuisances than little buddies.

So -those who want to get a second dog - you are getting it for YOU. Nothing wrong with that - but don't expect the first dog to fall round its neck with eager happiness. It's a bonus if they get on, but it's not a given.

Thanks Nettle, I have to say I'm almost relieved as I can see a second dog would be starting puppy period all over again, two minds to occupy etc etc. So if dogs prefer to be only dogs then whilst one never knows I'll just stick with Ted Thank goodness I found this forum, I'd have been shaping up for a second pup about now based upon what others had told me and hence certain disaster, and worse still certain disaster for Ted

I tease my wife about getting another dog. But I seriously doubt Jack would do well with another dog. if I am reading him right, and I think I am, he has limited social capacity for other dogs. He has progressed to the point he has a couple dog buddies, and genuinely seems to like them. if we haven't see them in a couple days he will pause in places we most likely will run into them and look around. when we see them, he seems genuinely happy to see them. But he "tires" of them fairly quickly too.

The other thing to consider is your time and space. Even IF Jack just seemed to LOVE any and all dogs and really, really seemed to enjoy the company of other dogs...the more the better etc, etc. I have neither the time nor the space to give a second dog what it would need. That is important too. when adding an additional dog or dogs, do you really have the time to give more than one dog what it needs in terms of attention, training, walks etc. do you live in a large enough place that the dogs can live comfortably together, depending on breed of course.

Where are the examples of other dogs who really really LOVE other dogs....

I can think of two, off the top of my head. One being working hounds - bred to live and work in a group, and for generations upon generations WE have bred them to do that... and yet they would all still far rather have the one to one attention of a human in most circumstances (and hence they all generally listen to the human in charge!)...

Ex racing greyhounds - tend to do better in pairs (though again, carefully thought out pairs, and groups, not just any old dogs slung together).... and why is this? Because WE (the generic, racing dog owning we), deprive them of contact with anything other than other greyhounds, and severely limit their environment to basically, kennel, paddock, track, van.

Once out of that environment though it takes time, again ex racers if they are lucky, find a human and really tend to prefer that human to anyone else.

In both instances we have engineered these breeds and their environments and if you put them into another context they still generally prefer humans!

Some breeds are more inclined to get along than others, particularly some breeds will recognise their own 'type' if not actual breed - I like sighthounds particularly as they are more tolerant of one another in general and whilst perhaps not best buddies with each other automatically, they DO tend to prick their ears up when they see another 'pointy shaped dog' like them.

There are other dogs we have a history of keeping as a group and that history tends to include kennelling or chaining dogs out separately. I am particularly thinking of working sled dogs, who are kept chained to their individual kennels (because if not they WILL fight, they may work as a team but that team is closely controlled and in fact they are in competition with one another much of the time!).. and also working terriers who are again, most frequently kept kennelled seperately!

My own dogs - some of them do like one another, some of them merely tolerate the others. They would all prefer to be with me than not, though some would prefer to be with a particular dog than totally alone (and would still prefer to be with ME than totally alone!).

As Nettle says, it takes work to keep a group of five dogs, which includes two bitches, rubbing along nicely - it is well balanced and not remotely by accident do I have a mixture of types. When spats occur, as they do, it is generally a terrier type in the mix and it takes a LOT of effort for the Deerhound to get riled (handy because shes a big lass to be chucking her weight about!). I have to say when my existing terrier type/mix dogs are no longer with me I won't be in a hurry to replace them unless I ever intend to have a single dog!